The questions you have here are valid, so perhaps they should be reiterated in the thread where Sami will give answers. (Some may be duplicates, so perhaps a "summary" number-by-number post there would be appropriate . . . frankly, there are so many questions it may be confusing without an itemized summary.)
Anyway, I keep getting sucked back in because I can't refrain from answering. AC also has tried admirably, and is also much more knowledgeable than I on WOT (he is still active . . . I am NOT . . . and he is also active on SA, so can render opinions there better than I can.)
As much as AC and I try to answer your questions, perhaps Sami can be more helpful.
Even if we totally accept the premise that WOT's criteria is "MUCH more comprehensive" than the others - in the absence of any suitable explanation WOT is failing to differentiate between minor infractions and a major threats. e.g. [If WOT bases an Amber or Red rating on spam alone, is that a fair rating when it is not accompanied by any form of explanation?]
Anyway, we could continue going round in circles here ad nauseum...I'll simply agree to disagree.
Thanks guys, your input here is very much appreciated - even if you have found it difficult to penetrate one particular stubborn, old head.
Cheers and beers...Jim